Support

A cookie is a piece of data stored by your browser or device that helps websites like this one recognize return visitors. We use cookies to give you the best experience on BNA.com. Some cookies are also necessary for the technical operation of our website. If you continue browsing, you agree to this site’s use of cookies.

Australian Money-Laundering Alliance a Stretch for U.S.

An anti-money laundering partnership between Australia’s big four banks and the continent’s
government designed to share more information in real time is getting good reviews
but probably isn’t exportable to the U.S., several lawyers and consultants said.

The Fintel Alliance launched in March “offers an unprecedented opportunity for government
and banks to share insights to combat the long-standing issue of serious financial
crime,” Aidan O’ Shaughnessy, policy director for the Australian Bankers’ Association,
told Bloomberg BNA.

Real-time information sharing could even help halt money-laundering transactions as
they happen, said Peter Reeves, special counsel at Gilbert and Tobin, Sydney, who
specializes in financial services law and AML regulation.

Nevertheless, privacy concerns, the much-larger size of the U.S. banking industry
and different AML requirements would all make it difficult to replicate the partnership
in the U.S. The U.S. also already has a quasi public-private partnership, AML experts
said.

All in a Day

The Australia partnership brings together the continent’s largest banks, the Australian
Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC) and other government and academic
institutions to share information about money laundering in near real-time in a bid
to combat the financing of terrorism, smuggling and other crimes.

The partnership is designed to allow a regulator to flag suspicious activity to bank
officials and then work with them to connect disparate information and summon law
enforcement--all in the course of a day, according to a video posted by AUSTRAC.

The alliance reflects a shift in thinking by the government “from a regulator that
seeks compliance to a regulator that seeks cooperation,” Reeves said. Indeed, one
of the reasons banks agreed to join the alliance was to reduce their compliance burdens,
Reeves said.

The initiative was conceived to transform the “siloed relationship” that existed between
banks and the government to “a partnership where solutions are co-designed in response
to mutual problems,” an AUSTRAC spokesman told Bloomberg BNA.

U.S.-Aus. Differences

There are several reasons the program may not be easily exported to the U.S., starting
with privacy concerns, according to Miami attorney Andrew Ittleman and others.

“You’ve got a lot of businesses with access to private information that they otherwise
wouldn’t have, [and] you don’t necessarily have the benefit of the federal government
coordinating the information-sharing between the private companies,” Ittleman, a white-collar
criminal defense attorney at Fuerst Ittleman David & Joseph, said. “It looks like
a free-for-all.”

Another factor is that in most cases, financial institutions in Australia must file
suspicious activity reports within 72 hours. In the U.S., institutions have up to
30 days and can file for extensions, making real-time information-sharing less imperative.

It’s a major difference, said Don Andrews, who heads the compliance and risk-management
unit at Venable LLP, New York. “One thing I think would get significant pushback,
and maybe rightly so, would be getting reporting down to a matter of days” in the
U.S., he said. “That’s a pretty big burden to place on a financial institution.”

Priorities

The Fintel alliance is a good way for banks to learn about law enforcement priorities,
Robert Rowe, vice president and associate chief counsel for the American Bankers Association,
said. Such information currently is lacking in the U.S., he and others said. Banks
are “trying to get a better understanding about where to focus their energies,” Rowe
said. “The banks are saying, `if you tell us what the problem is, we know where to
look and what to look for.’”

Andrews agreed, saying, “a little more direction from the government would be helpful.
Firms are spending billions of dollars to comply with [AML] requirements, so it’s
very important that the government be incredibly clear about what it’s looking for.”

Dennis Lormel, a former FBI agent who specialized in AML enforcement, cited costs
and regulatory concerns as reasons banks might not be keen on forming an alliance
with the government. “When the general counsel for some of the major banks get involved
in this, they look at it like, `we’re just asking for trouble if we open ourselves
up to something like this,’” Lormel said.

Banks also are “very concerned and and overly conservative as a result of regulatory
expectations,”
Lormel, who now runs DML Associates LLC, a consulting firm that helps financial institutions
with compliance, said. “If they go above and beyond what they’re expected to do, then
the expectation is they’re gong to do it on a regular basis.”

Present Partnership

Several AML observers also said that U.S. banks and the government already have a
functioning AML partnership appropriate to the size of the financial services industry,
making a formal alliance like Australia’s—with its much smaller banking industry—less
necessary.

“The reality is, we have a pretty good public-private partnership between banks and
law enforcement,” said David Stewart, director of the financial crimes and compliance
unit of Cary, N.C., analytics software firm SAS Institute Inc. Stewart cited the USA
PATRIOT Act as one conduit for information-sharing, as well as a “close network of
relationships”
between financial institutions and the Department of Justice. “The question is whether
the current system could be improved with technology to share data in real-time between
the public and private sectors,”
he said.

Rowe agreed that there’s a dialogue, but said the banking industry has sought a more
formal alliance over the years. “Believe it or not, law enforcement says, we don’t
have the time,” Rowe said.

However, according to Sharon Cohen Levin, a former top U.S. AML official, the Australian
program of “out-and-out collaboration” between the government and financial institutions
“would be welcome in the U.S.”
Levin, former chief of the money laundering and asset forfeiture unit in the U.S.
Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, said that while a U.S. alliance
would have to be consistent with U.S. AML rules, “in the end, I think it would lead
to better law enforcement outcomes.”

The collaboration gives financial institutions “a better understanding of the criminal
conduct and the patterns of suspicious activity, which produces more complete suspicious
activity reporting,” Levin, now a partner at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr
LLP, New York, said.

Back-and-Forth Information

U.S. AML efforts are spearheaded in the government by the Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network. FinCEN spokesman Stephen Hudak pointed to remarks by Deputy Director Jamal
El-Hindi in November that financial intelligence “is most effective when information
flows in both directions between the public and private sectors.”

Like Stewart, El-Hindi said the USA PATRIOT Act allows the government and financial
institutions to share information. “It’s a successful program,”
he said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Richard Hill in Washington at
rhill@bna.com

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Phyllis Diamond at
pdiamond@bna.com

All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to books@bna.com.

Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)

Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).

This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to research@bna.com.

Put me on standing order

Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)